Hello America,
My name is Tony Whitcomb and I am the Founder and CEO of Expotera.
I have created Expotera, as well as this Blog, to let the good, honest and hardworking Citizens of this Country know that the Revolution has now begun.
Power To The People!!

Some look away, deny what’s happening, and search out escape
routes into imaginary tomorrows: a life off the grid, space colonies,
immortality in paradise, explicit denial, or consumer satiety in a
wireless, robot-staffed, 3D-printed techno-utopia.

Meanwhile, the rich take shelter in their fortresses, isolating
themselves with their air conditioning, private schools, and
well-paid guards.

Fight. Flight. Flight. Fight.

The threat of death activates our deepest animal drives.

The aggression and fear that arise in response to perceived threats
are some of the most intense emotions we ever experience.

For human society to function at all, these instinctive reactions
have to be carefully managed and channeled.

Outbreaks of panic and hate are dangerous, but lower levels of
aggression and fear help keep a population controllable and productive.

Restrained aggression keeps people suspicious of collective action
and working hard to overcome their fellows, while constant,
generalized anxiety keeps people servile, unwilling to take risks,
and yearning for comfort from whatever quarter, whether the
dulling sameness of herd thought or the dumb security of consumer
goods.

Since at least September 11, 2001, people in the United States
have been subject to an unprecedented terror campaign—not
from Al Qaeda, but from the United States government.

National domestic policy transformed, “security” into constant
fear, threatening its citizens at every turn: first with alarms
of explosions and anthrax, then with prison, austerity-produced
structural unemployment, and harassment, and finally with
torture, SWAT tanks, snipers, drones, and total surveillance.

Owing to the racial logic of US politics, in which white/black is
the definitive semiotic distinction structuring American society,
most of the government’s violence against its own citizens is
vdirected against those with darker skin, but in subtler ways its
terror campaign targets every single person who flies coach,
watches the news, or uses the Internet.

Fear comes to us every day in our encounters with an increasingly
militarized police and our humiliating interactions with metal
detectors, body-scan machines and full-body searches in isolated
rooms without windows.

Fear comes to us in the absence of job security, in our want of
appeal when confronted by institutionalized inequality, and in
our mistrust of corrupt institutions.

Fear comes to us in widespread surveillance, in the form of
a homeless woman or a hospitalized friend without adequate
financial support, and in the constant nagging worry that
we’re not working hard enough, not happy enough, never
going to, “make it.”

“People will do almost anything to avoid being afraid. When,
despite the best efforts, [fear and anxiety] do break through,
people go to incredible lengths to shut them down.”

Sometimes when these vibrations shake us, we discharge them by
passing them on, retweeting the story, reposting the video, hoping
that others will validate our reaction, thus assuaging our fear by
assuring ourselves that collective attention has been alerted to the
threat.

Other times we react with aversion, working to dampen the
vibrations by searching out positive reinforcements, pleasurable
images and videos, something funny, something—anything—to
ease the fear.

We buy something. We eat food. We pop a pill. We fuck.

In either passing on the vibration or reacting against it, we let
the fear short circuit our own autonomous desires, diverting us
from our goals and loading ever more emotional static into our
daily cognitive processing.

We become increasingly distracted from our ambitions
and increasingly susceptible to such distraction.

And whether we retransmit or react, we reinforce channels of
thought, perception, behavior, and emotion that, over time,
come to shape our habits and our personality.

As we train ourselves to resonate fear and aggression, we reinforce
patterns of thought and feeling that shape a society that breeds the
same.

Fight-or-flight is compelling because it serves essential
evolutionary purposes.

It increases alertness and adrenaline flow, and generally
works to keep the human animal alive.

As we proceed into the Anthropocene, though, capitalism’s cultural
machinery for balancing fear and aggression against desire and
pleasure is grinding and sputtering sparks.

What cultural theorist Lauren Berlant has identified as the, “cruel
optimism” of a system sustained by hopes that can never be
fulfilled mixes dangerously with an atmosphere of beleaguered
anxiety, increasing frustration with working-class and middle-class
economic stagnation, and a pervasive sadistic voyeurism that grows
by what it feeds on.

While America’s fraying social infrastructure holds together, our
fear and aggression can be channeled into labor, consumption,
and economic competition, with professional sports, hyperviolent
television, and occasional protests to let off steam.

Once the social fabric begins to tear, though, we risk unleashing
not only rioting, rebellion, and civil war, but homicidal politics
the likes of which should make our blood run cold.

Consider: Once among the most modern, Westernized nations in the
Middle East, with a robust, highly educated middle class, Iraq has
been blighted for decades by imperialist aggression, criminal gangs,
interference in its domestic politics, economic liberalization, and
sectarian feuding.

Today it is being torn apart between a corrupt petrocracy, a
breakaway Kurdish experiment in anarchism, and a self-declared
Islamic fundamentalist caliphate, while a civil war in neighboring
Syria spills across its borders.

These conflicts have likely been caused in part and exacerbated
by the worst drought the Middle East has seen in modern history.

Since 2006, Syria has been suffering crippling water shortages that
have, in some areas, caused 75 percent crop failure and wiped out
85 percent of livestock, left more than 800,000 Syrians without a
livelihood, and sent hundreds of thousands of impoverished young
men streaming into Syria’s cities.

This drought is part of long-term warming and drying trends
that are transforming the Middle East.

Not just water but oil, too, is elemental to these conflicts.

Iraq sits on the fifth largest proven oil reserves in the world.

Meanwhile, the Islamic State has been able to survive only
because it has taken control of most of Syria’s oil and gas
production.

We tend to think of climate change and violent religious
fundamentalism as isolated phenomena, but as Retired
Navy Rear Admiral David Titley argues, “you can draw a
very credible climate connection to this disaster we call
ISIS right now.”

A few hundred miles away, Israeli soldiers spent the summer
of 2014 killing Palestinians in Gaza.

Israel has also been suffering drought, while Gaza has been
in the midst of a critical water crisis exacerbated by Israel’s
military aggression.

The International Committee for the Red Cross reported that during
summer 2014, Israeli bombers targeted Palestinian wells and water
infrastructure.

It’s not water and oil this time, but water and gas: some observers
argue that Israel’s, “Operation Protective Edge” was intended to
establish firmer control over the massive Leviathan natural gas
field, discovered off the coast of Gaza in the eastern Mediterranean
in 2010.

Meanwhile, thousands of miles to the north, Russian backed
separatists fought fascist paramilitary forces defending the
elected government of Ukraine, which was also suffering
drought.

Russia’s role as an oil and gas exporter in the region and the natural
gas pipelines running through Ukraine from Russia to Europe cannot
but be key issues in the conflict.

Elsewhere, droughts in 2014 sent refugees from Guatemala and
Honduras north to the US border, devastated crops in California
and Australia, and threatened millions of lives in Eritrea, Somalia,
Ethiopia, Sudan, Uganda, Afghanistan, India, Morocco, Pakistan,
and parts of China.

Across the world, massive protests and riots have swept Bosnia and
Herzegovina, Venezuela, Brazil, Turkey, Egypt, and Thailand, while
conflicts rage on in Colombia, Libya, the Central African Republic,
Sudan, Nigeria, Yemen, and India.

And while the world burns, the United States has been playing
chicken with Russia over control of Eastern Europe and the melting
Arctic, and with China over control of Southeast Asia and the South
China Sea, threatening global war on a scale not seen in seventy
years.

This is our present and future: droughts and hurricanes, refugees
and border guards, war for oil, water, gas, and food.

We experience this world of strife today in one of two modes:
either it is our environment, and we are in it, or it comes to us
as images, social excitation, re-transmitted fear.

People are fighting and dying in ruined cities all over the planet.

Neighbors are killing each other.

Old women are bleeding to death in bombed rubble and children
are being murdered, probably as you read this sentence.

To live in this world is horrific.

Constant danger strains every nerve.

The only things that matter are survival, killing the enemy,
reputation, and having a safe place to sleep.

The experience of being human narrows to a cutting edge.

I remember living in that world many years ago in occupied
Baghdad.

Today that world seems impossibly distant, yet every day it presses
in on me in a never-ending stream of words, images, appeals, and
reports.

I see videos. I read stories. I see pictures of this or that suffering
or injustice and I am moved.

To act, perhaps, but more accurately to emote.
To react. To feel. To perform.

We do not usually ask where these feelings come from or who they
serve, but we all know that the cultural technologies transmitting
these affective vibrations are not neutral: news outlets shape
information to fit their owners’ prejudices, while Facebook,
Twitter, and Google shape our perceptions through hidden
algorithms.

The specialization and demographic targeting of contemporary
media tend to narrow the channels of perception to the point that
we receive only those images and vibrations which already
harmonize with our own prejudices, our own pre-existing desires,
thus intensifying our particular emotional reactions along an
increasingly limited band, impelling us to discharge our emotions
within the same field of ready listeners, for which we are rewarded
with, “Likes” and, “Favorites.”

Our consciousness is shaped daily through feedback systems where
some post or headline provokes a feeling and we discharge that
feeling by provoking it in others.

Social media like Facebook crowd source catharsis, creating
self-contained wave pools of aggression and fear, pity and
terror, stagnant flows that go nowhere and do nothing.

Pictures of children killed by bombs or police, or pictures of the
devastation left in the wake of a tropical storm may move me to
sadness and horror.

Re-transmitting such images will pass along that
sadness and horror.

My act of transmission will mark me as someone who has
feelings about these things and who condemns them.

I can rationalize my re-transmission by saying that I am,
“raising awareness” or trying to influence public policy:

I want my fellow citizens to be as horrified as I am, so they’ll think
like I do, or so they’ll vote for a representative who works to
prevent such horrors from happening, or maybe so that if enough
of us all think the same way and feel the same way, the organs and
institutions of power will be forced to hear us and align themselves
along our vibrations, the way a honeybee colony will pick a site for
a new hive through the dance of its advance guard scouts.

These are perfectly reasonable human assumptions, because
that is how physical human collectives function.

Anyone who has been in a crowd, a basketball team, a nightclub,
a choir, or a protest knows how bodies resonate together.

But politics is the energetic distribution of bodies in systems,
and we live in a system of carbon-fueled capitalism that we
shouldn’t expect to work in physical human ways for several
reasons, especially when it comes to responding to the threat
of global warming.

First, our political and social media technologies are not neutral,
but have been developed to serve particular interests, most notably
targeted advertising, concentration of wealth, and ideological
control, and the vibrations that seem to resonate most strongly
along these channels are envy, adulation, outrage, fear, hatred,
and mindless pleasure.

Second, the more we pass on or react to social vibrations, the
more we strengthen our habits of channeling and the less we
practice autonomous reflection or independent critical thought.

With every protest chant, retweet, and Facebook post,
we become stronger resonators and weaker thinkers.

Third, however intense our social vibrations grow, they remain
locked within machinery that offers no political leverage: they do
not translate into political action, because they do not connect to
the flows of power.

Finally, while the typical collective human response to threat is to
identify an enemy, pick sides, and mobilize to fight, global warming
offers no apprehensible foe.

That hasn’t stopped people from trying to find one.

The Flood Wall Street protesters say the enemy is American
corporations.

Tanzania’s Jakaya Kikwete and Nauru’s Baron Waqa say the
problem is the United States and Great Britain.

Tea Party Republicans would blame Barack Obama, I’m sure, if they
admitted that global warming was actually happening and caused
by human activity.

Meanwhile, NPR listening liberals want to believe that Tea Party
Republicans are responsible, so that they can frame the problem
as one amenable to solution by moral education and enlightened
consumerism, as if it were all a matter of convincing people to
eat more kale and drive electric cars.

One climate activist has argued that just 90 companies are
responsible for almost two-thirds of all historical greenhouse gas
emissions, which conveniently absolves billions of automobile
drivers, airline passengers, meat eaters, and cellphone users of
responsibility.

The enemy isn’t out there somewhere—the enemy is ourselves.

Not as individuals, but as a collective. A system. A hive.

How do we stop ourselves from fulfilling our fates as suicidally
productive drones in a carbon-addicted hive, destroying ourselves
in some kind of psychopathic colony collapse disorder?

How do we interrupt the perpetual circuits of fear, aggression,
crisis, and reaction that continually prod us to ever more intense
levels of manic despair?

One way we might begin to answer these questions is by considering
the problem of global warming in terms of Peter Sloterdijk’s idea of
the philosopher as an interrupter:

We live constantly in collective fields of excitation; this cannot
be changed so long as we are social beings.

The input of stress inevitably enters me; thoughts are not free,
each of us can divine them.

They come from the newspaper and wind up returning to the
newspaper.

My sovereignty, if it exists, can only appear by my letting the
integrated impulsion die in me or, should this fail, by my re-
transmitting it in a totally metamorphosed, verified, filtered,
or recoded form.

It serves nothing to contest it: I am free only to the extent that
I interrupt escalations and that I am able to immunize myself
against infections of opinion.

Precisely this continues to be the philosopher’s mission in society,
if I may express myself in such pathetic terms.

His mission is to show that a subject can be an interrupter, not
merely a channel that allows thematic epidemics and waves of
excitation to flow through it.

The classics express this with the term, ‘pondering.’

With this concept, ethics and energetics enter into contact: as
a bearer of a philosophical function, I have neither the right nor
the desire to be either a conductor in a stress-semantic chain or
the automaton of an ethical imperative.

Sloterdijk compares the conception of political function as
collective vibration to a philosophical function of interruption.

As opposed to disruption, which shocks a system and breaks
wholes into pieces, interruption suspends continuous processes.

It’s not smashing, but sitting with.

Not blockage, but reflection.

He sees the role of the philosopher in the human swarm as that
of an aberrant anti-drone slow dancing to its own rhythm, neither
attuned to the collective beat nor operating mechanically,
dogmatically, deontologically, but continually self-immunizing
against the waves of social energy we live in and amongst by
perpetually interrupting its own connection to collective life.

So long as one allows oneself to be, “a conductor in a stress-
semantic chain,” one is strengthening channels of re-transmission
regardless of content, thickening the reflexive connective tissues
of mass society, making all of us more susceptible to such viral
phenomena as nationalism, scapegoating, panic, and war fever.

Interrupting the flows of social production is anarchic and
counterproductive, like all good philosophy: if it works, it
helps us stop and see our world in new ways.

If it fails, as it often and even usually does, the interrupter
is integrated, driven mad, ignored, or destroyed.

What Sloterdijk helps us see is that responding autonomously
to social excitation means not reacting to it, not passing it on,
but interrupting it, then either letting the excitation die or
transforming it completely.

Responding freely to constant images of fear and violence,
responding freely to the perpetual media circuits of pleasure
and terror, responding freely to the ongoing alarms of war,
environmental catastrophe, and global destruction demands a
reorientation of feeling so that every new impulse is held at a
distance until it fades or can be changed.

While life beats its red rhythms and human swarms dance
to the compulsion of strife, the interrupter learns how to
die.

—Roy Scranton, Learning to Die in the Anthropocene: Reflections on
the End of a Civilization

Sunday, June 26, 2016

All the politicians, the corporate moguls, the bankers, the lawyers,
the super rich, the movers, the shakers, and the power players.

CC: All of Us.

The people who are quickly being enslaved, thinned,
choked to death, and bled dry.

Re: “We Will Not Go Quietly Into That Good Night.”

Dear Sirs,

This once great nation,
can no longer stand the inflation,
brought about through manipulation,
greed, and politically correct capitulation,
to the puppets put in place by your corporations,
agents of the beast, the bringers of this abomination.

It’s all been foretold.
You too can read the end.
If you do it right now.

Today.

If they haven’t led you too far astray,
with the purchase of the watchdogs of the people,
the media who sings their praises, hymnals from a steeple,
of purposefully disseminated, government approved, misinformation.

Yet another of the many deadly plagues spewed forth
from every single station.

Children are starving across the nation,
while you yet again go on another vacation.
Grandmothers die in the un-air-conditioned heat,
so on fancy five hundred dollar sheets you can sleep.

A mother is threatened with jail,
for growing vegetables for her child.
A soldier billed for risking his life,
so you can wage war for what you revile,
money, power, oil, “redistribution” control.

When was it exactly that you sold your very soul?

You have to know that a far greater hell for you awaits,
for all of those who commit evil through legislative mandates.

It’s all been foretold.
You too can read the end.
You had really best do it today.
Before they take that right too away.

The four horseman gallop across all nations,
as was long ago written in the book of Revelations.

And he who rode a white horse was sent out to conquer.
When government works against the masses we go asunder.

The next horseman rode a red horse and was given a large sword.
Have you heard the news?
Surely you know of the war mongering hoards?

Earthquakes in diver’s places,
reported daily by smiling faces.

And many shall be greatly deceived.
Be wise as a serpent. You best take heed.

Time is running out. It was long ago decreed.
Didn’t we all know we would be destroyed through greed?

Will You Afford to Eat?

The third horseman rode upon a black horse with scales in hand.
After him, sprang up famine, starvation, deprivation upon all in
all lands.

Prices rose so high and so fast,
all the people could do was slave all day just to eat.
Do you see the specter of inflation at the register?
How close is your bank account to beat?

The fourth horseman sat upon a horse that was pale.
The power over death given to him, to rain hell in war‘s
fiery gale...

He’s the one to watch for, the last.
For the other’s having already come,
rode crisscrossed ways across an aching globe,
as certain as the path of the sun.

You can see their tracks if you but take a look.
Somalia is starving, and Japan is past starting to cook.
London has burned, and Greece is a riot,
Thank you Facebook.

What a tool for the New World Order,
your whole life wrapped up and took,
in binary code now filed away,
so it can be used against you one day.

I fear that day is not very far off, my dear friends.
Will you be ready when it all blows, when the chipping begins?

If you are still alive that is.

Where will you go when your money is not your own,
when you can’t afford to live and you no longer have a home?

Do you think they will take care of us all then?
The ones we elected.
Do you really think you, your family, your rights,
your very life, will be protected?

Prepare now my friends.
You are living the very end.

They won’t help you and you best take heed.
If you don’t believe me, just research their deeds.

Open your door and look outside.
What you see may make you want to hide.

We all may have to do so, and very, very soon.
Please, wake up now and stop marching to their tune.

It’s all been foretold.
You too can read the end.
You had really best do it today.
Before they take that right too away.

God bless and keep we, the people,
being assaulted from all sides by your evil.

In the end, as was written, what is good will hold sway.
The question is how many of us will be alive on that day?

Thank you, sirs, for your attention.
Can you yet smell the global dissention?

We, “will not go quietly into that good night.”
Prepare yourselves, sirs, for one hell of a fight.

Friday, June 24, 2016

As we head toward the Democratic National Convention, I often
hear the question, “What does Bernie want?”

Wrong question.

The right question is what the 12 million Americans who voted
for a political revolution want.

And the answer is:

They want real change in this country, they want it now and they
are prepared to take on the political cowardice and powerful
special interests which have prevented that change from
happening.

They understand that the United States is the richest country in the
history of the world, and that new technology and innovation make
us wealthier every day.

What they don’t understand is why the middle class continues
to decline, 47 million of us live in poverty and many Americans
are forced to work two or three jobs just to cobble together the
income they need to survive.

What do we want?

We want an economy that is not based on uncontrollable greed,
monopolistic practices and illegal behavior.

We want an economy that protects the human needs and dignity of
all people — children, the elderly, the sick, working people and the
poor.

We want an economic and political system that works for all of us, not one in which almost all new wealth and power rests with a handful of billionaire families.

The current campaign finance system is corrupt.

Billionaires and powerful corporations are now, through super PACs,
able to spend as much money as they want to buy elections and
elect candidates who represent their interests, not the American
people.

Meanwhile, we have one of the lowest voter turnout rates of any
major country on earth, and Republican governors are working
overtime to suppress the vote and make it harder for poor people,
people of color, seniors and young people to vote.

What do we want?

We want to overturn the disastrous Citizens United Supreme Court
decision and move toward public funding of elections.

We want universal voter registration, so that anyone 18 years
of age or older who is eligible to vote is automatically registered.

We want a vibrant democracy and a well-informed electorate
that knows that its views can shape the future of the country.

Our criminal justice system is broken.

We have 2.2 million people rotting behind
bars, at an annual expense of $80 billion.

Youth unemployment in a number of inner-cities and
rural communities is 30 to 50 percent, and millions of
young people have limited opportunities to participate
in the productive economy.

Failing schools all around the country produce more
people who end up in jail, than graduate college.

Millions of Americans have police records as a result of
marijuana possession, which should be decriminalized.

And too many people are serving unnecessarily long
mandatory minimum sentences.

What do we want?

We want a criminal justice system that addresses the causes
of incarceration, not one that simply imprisons more people.

We want to demilitarize local police departments, see local
police departments reflect the diversity of the communities
they serve and end private ownership of prisons and detention centers.

We want to create the conditions that allow people who
are released from prison to stay out.

We want the best educated population on earth, not the
most incarcerated population.

The debate is over. Climate change is real. It is caused by human
activity, and it already is causing devastating damage in our country
and to the entire planet.

If present trends continue, scientists tell us the planet will be 5 to
10 degrees Fahrenheit warmer by the end of the century — which
means more droughts, floods, extreme weather disturbances, rising
sea levels and acidification of the oceans.

This is a planetary crisis of extraordinary magnitude.

What do we want?

We want the United States to lead the world in pushing our energy
system away from fossil fuel, and toward energy efficiency and
sustainable energy.

We want a tax on carbon, the end of fracking and massive
investment in wind, solar, geothermal and other sustainable
technologies.

We want to leave this planet in a way that is healthy
and habitable for future generations.

What do we want?

We want to end the rapid movement that we are currently
experiencing toward oligarchic control of our economic and
political life.

As Lincoln put it at Gettysburg, we want a government
of the people, by the people, and for the people.

The senseless murder of forty-nine revelers at an Orlando, Florida
nightclub has amplified our need for a long overdue national
conversation this election season about the overall direction of
U.S. foreign policy and our proper role in the world.

With the party nominating conventions just weeks away,
now is a good time to start.

In what was billed as a major foreign policy address several weeks
ago, Hillary Clinton who will carry the Democratic banner in this
year’s contest for the White House, got the ball rolling,
characterizing presumptive GOP nominee Donald Trump’s views as
“dangerous.”

Focusing on Trump’s statement that Japan and South Korea should
defend themselves, rather than rely on the United States, even if
this includes the possible use of nuclear weapons, Clinton was
anything but subtle.

“This is not someone who should ever have the nuclear codes
because it’s not hard to imagine Donald Trump leading us into
a war just because somebody got under his very thin skin.”

By comparison, Lyndon Johnson’s 1964 television ad smearing
Barry Goldwater, which featured a nuclear mushroom cloud,
and a little girl with a flower, was the epitome of subtlety.

Clinton’s biting attack on Trump got high marks from many in
the media.

Yet, ironically, Trump’s foreign policy views, if you think about it,
are less scary even in their implications for possible nuclear war,
than Clinton’s belligerent, "Interventionism" sold as, “American
World Leadership.”

Even if one fervently opposes nuclear proliferation, a strong case
can be made that the United States should spend more time
worrying about the radical or unstable countries that either have
nuclear weapons or are seeking them such as Iran, Saudi Arabia,
Egypt, Pakistan and North Korea, than worrying about Japan and
South Korea.

But that’s not where Clinton chose to take us.

Instead, Clinton and much of the U.S. foreign policy elite,
Republican and Democrat alike, obsess about Trump saying
what should be obvious.

It would not be a catastrophe if Japan, and South Korea, stable
democratic societies and good world citizens, were able to deter
aggression, if need be, even with nuclear weapons.

In fact, for many years, the U.S. foreign policy establishment has
covered up the danger to the American public, an illusion created
by America’s extensive web of international security alliances and
agreements.

There is no plausible scenario in which any of our NATO allies, or
any of the other nations that rely on the U.S. security umbrella
Japan, South Korea, Taiwan, and Israel, for example, is going to
be called upon to defend the United States.

As a practical matter it only works the other way: we guarantee
their security.

Very few U.S. allies have nuclear weapons, and if they get into a
scuffle with a nuclear power such as China or Russia, even over a
minor issue, such as contested rocks in the South China Sea, the
United States could ultimately be responsible by treaty to defend
them.

This ultimately could mean using nuclear weapons and inviting
a retaliatory strike on American soil.

This essentially irrational policy was initiated during the Cold War
to protect countries from attack by the powerful Soviet Union.

However, as bad as a Soviet takeover of Western Europe or Japan
would have been, it pales in comparison to American cities
becoming nuclear wastelands.

The implicit U.S. pledge to use nuclear weapons to defend its allies
was predicated on the risky notion that it would deter a Soviet
attack.

There was little or no conversation about the cataclysmic horror
that could result if deterrence didn’t work.

If the policy was irrational during the Cold War, continuing it has
been even more irrational since the Cold War ended.

Donald Trump is wise to question the United States outdated,
inflexible, and costly commitment to protect large numbers of
nations around the world.

Such formal and informal alliances are the core of an overextended
American foreign policy that requires having hundreds of U.S.
military bases overseas and conducting countless, now seemingly
perpetual military campaigns, such as the wars Clinton supported
in the Balkans, Iraq, and Libya, to support this informal American
Empire.

With a $19 trillion national debt, the United States can no longer
afford such a policy.

Besides, it is unwise and puts the American public and our military
unnecessarily at risk.

Monday, June 20, 2016

There is nothing new about evil; it has been with us since time
immemorial.

But there is something new about the kind of evil that characterizes
our contemporary liquid-modern world.

The evil that characterized earlier forms of solid modernity was
concentrated in the hands of states claiming monopolies on the
means of coercion and using the means at their disposal to pursue
their ends, ends that were at times horrifically brutal and barbaric.

In our contemporary liquid-modern societies, by contrast, evil
has become altogether more pervasive and at the same time
less visible.

Liquid evil hides in the seams of the canvas woven daily by
the liquid-modern mode of human interaction and commerce.

It conceals itself in the very tissue of human interaction
and commerce.

It conceals itself in the very tissue of human co-habitation
and in the course of its routine and day-to-day reproduction.

Evil lurks in the countless black holes of a thoroughly deregulated
and privatized social space in which cut-throat competition and
mutual estrangement have replaced cooperation and solidarity,
while forceful individualization erodes the adhesive power of inter-
human bonds.

In its present form evil is hard to spot, unmask and resist.

It seduces us by its ordinariness and then jumps out without
warning, striking seemingly at random.

The result is a social world that is comparable to a minefield.

We know it is full of explosives and that explosions will happen
sooner or later, but we have no idea when and where they will
occur.

- Detention in her computer, at home and on a non-secure server,
of 1,200 secret documents (Section 1924)

- Felony – Mrs. Clinton declared under oath to a Federal judge that
she had given all her emails to the State Department. However, the
Inspector General of the State Department declared this week that
this was a lie (Section 798) ;

- Moreover, she declared under oath that the State Department had
authorized her to use her personal computer to work at home. The
Inspector General of the State Department declared this week that
this was a lie (Section 798) ;

- Mrs. Clinton did not alert the authorities, nor even her own
Department, that her personal computer had been hacked several
times. Yet she had asked her system administrator to try to protect
her computer.

- Misappropriation and Concealment. The Clinton Foundation and
Mrs. Clinton were corrupted so that the State Department would
close their eyes to various practices (Rico Law and Section 1503).

In principle, and since the facts and their gravity have been
established by the FBI, the State Department, and a Federal
Judge, Hillary Clinton should have been arrested this week.

Bernie Sanders, the other candidate for the Democratic nomination,
was counting on Mrs. Clinton’s arrest before their party’s
convention.

He therefore decided to stay in the running, although he does not
have enough delegates.

But he was summoned to the White House, and informed that
President Barack Obama would prevent his administration from
applying the law.

Obama then followed through by publicly announcing his support
for the candidacy of Mrs. Clinton.

Thursday, June 16, 2016

In the twenty-five years since the fall of the Berlin Wall, the
architecture of liberal modernity has looked relatively stable.

Not flawless or wonderful or ideal, to be sure; not free
of discontents and decadence.

But it’s been hard to imagine the basic liberal democratic capitalist
order cracking up, let alone envision what might take its place.

Through the dot-com bust, 9/11, the Iraq war, and the financial
crisis, it was striking how consensus held, how elites kept
circulating, how quickly populist movements collapsed or were
co-opted, how Washington and Brussels consolidated power even
when their projects failed.

No new ideological movement, whether radical or reactionary,
emerged to offer the alternative to liberalism that fascism and
Marxism and throne-and-altar traditionalism once supplied.

And no external adversary, whether Putinist or Islamist or Chinese,
seemed to offer a better way than ours.

Here in the dying days of 2016, though, something seems to have
shifted.

For the first time in a generation, the theme of this year was the
liberal order’s vulnerability, not its resilience.

2015 was a memento mori moment for our institutions — a year of
cracks in the system, of crumbling firewalls, of reminders that all
orders pass away.

Friday, June 10, 2016

On June 03, 2016 our world loss a boxing legend and global icon,
"Muhammad Ali" and today as the world mourns and prepares to
say goodbye to, "The Greatest" below is what Muhammad Ali had
to say to David Frost during a 1974 interview when Mr. Frost asked
Muhammad, "What would you like people to think about you when
you've gone?"

And below this is what Muhammad Ali had to say about, "Himself" in
a statement before his March 31, 1973 Heavy Weight Championship
Title Fight with George Foreman.

And now all I would like to say is, rest in eternal love and eternal
peace, "Champ" because you truly were, "The Greatest of All Time"
and as a final tribute to you, I now very humbly present a portion
of your 1974 interview with David Frost, along with your statement
right before your, "Heavy Weight Championship Title Fight" with
George Foreman, which was called, "The Rumble In The Jungle"
back on March 31, 1973:

Interview With David Frost (1974)

David Frost: What would you like people to think about you when you've gone?

Muhammad Ali: I'd like for them to say:

He took a few cups of love.
He took one tablespoon of patience,
One teaspoon of generosity,
One pint of kindness.
He took one quart of laughter,
One pinch of concern.
And then, he mixed willingness with happiness.
He added lots of faith,
And he stirred it up well.
Then he spread it over a span of a lifetime,
And he served it to each and every deserving person he met.

Statement Before His Fight With George Foreman (March 31, 1973)

Last night I had a dream,
When I got to Africa,
I had one hell of a rumble.

I had to beat Tarzan’s behind first,
For claiming to be King of the Jungle.

For this fight,
I’ve wrestled with alligators,
I’ve tussled with a whale.

I done handcuffed lightning,
And thrown thunder in jail.

You know I’m bad.

Just last week,
I murdered a rock,
Injured a stone,
Hospitalized a brick.

Tuesday, June 7, 2016

On June 20, 1967, Muhammad Ali was convicted in Houston,
Texas for refusing induction in the U.S. armed forces.

Ali saw the war in Vietnam as an exercise in genocide.

He also used his platform as the, "Heavy Weight Boxing Champion
of The World" to connect the war abroad, with the war at home,
by saying the following on April 28, 1967:

Why should they ask me to put on a uniform and go ten thousand
miles from home and drop bombs and bullets on brown people in
Vietnam while so-called Negro people in Louisville are treated like
dogs and denied simple human rights?

No, I am not going ten thousand miles from home to help murder
and burn another poor nation simply to continue the domination of
white slave masters of the darker people the world over.

This is the day when such evils must come to an end.

I have been warned that to take such a stand would put my prestige
in jeopardy and could cause me to lose millions of dollars which
should accrue to me as the champion.

I hold the world heavyweight title not because it was given to me,
not because of my race or religion, but because I won it in the ring.

Those who want to take it and start a series of auction-type bouts
not only do me a disservice, but actually disgrace themselves...

Sports fans and fair-minded people throughout America would never
accept such a title-holder.

But I have said it once and I will say it again.

The real enemy of my people is right here.

I will not disgrace my religion, my people or myself by becoming
a tool to enslave those who are fighting for their own justice,
freedom and equality…

If I thought the war was going to bring freedom and equality to
twenty-two million of my people they wouldn’t have to draft me,
I’d join tomorrow.

Saturday, June 4, 2016

Yesterday our world loss truly one of the greatest athlete's, boxer's, champion's, humanitarian's, and, "Poets" of all time, Muhammad Ali.

So below I now very sadly, as well as very humbly present for you,
a poem that Muhammad Ali wrote back in July of 1972 which he
very touchingly called a, "Poetic Poem" because in his own words,
"He Could Float Like A Butterfly And Sting Like A Bee" and he will
always be loved, appreciated, missed, and remembered by millions,
upon millions of friends, family members, and fans, just like me,
so, "Rest In Peace" Brother Muhammad Ali and may your incredible
words below now finish speaking for a sad and very emotional me:

Better far from all I see
To die fighting to be free
What more fitting end could be?

Better surely than in some bed
Lingering until I’m dead

Better than with prayers and pleas
Or in the clutch of some disease
Wasting slowly by degrees

Better than of heart attack
Or some dose of drug I lack
Let me die by being Black

Better far that I should go
Standing here against the foe
Is the sweeter death to know

Better than the bloody stain
On some highway where I’m lain
Torn by flying glass and pane

Better calling death to come
Than to die another dumb
Muted victim in the slum

Better than of this prison rot
If there’s any choice I’ve got
Kill me here on the spot

Better far my fight to wage
Now while my blood boils with rage
Lest it cool with ancient age

Better vowing for us to die
Than to Uncle Tom and try
Making peace just to live a lie

Better now that I say my sooth
I’m gonna die demanding truth
While I’m still akin to youth

Better now than later on
Now that fear of death is gone
Never mind another dawn.

Search This Blog

About Me

My name is Tony Whitcomb. I am a Social Entrepreneur, Founder and CEO of Expotera.
I created Expotera and this Blog, to teach Corporate America and our Government, a few basic lessons in Ethics, Honesty, Macro Economics and Social Justice.
Power To The People!!